an any other of the
contemporary reporters of common gossip. But at least he is worthy of no
less. And it is undeniable that in Sforza's case a strong motive for the
murder was not lacking.

My narrative in "The Night of Hate" is admittedly a purely theoretical
account of the crime. But it is closely based upon all the known facts
of incidence and of character; and if there is nothing in the surviving
records that will absolutely support it, neither is there anything that
can absolutely refute it.

In "The Night of Masquerade" I am guilty of quite arbitrarily
discovering a reason to explain the mystery of Baron Bjelke's sudden
change from the devoted friend and servant of Gustavus III of Sweden
into his most bitter enemy. That speculation is quite indefensible,
although affording a possible explanation of that mystery. In the case
of "The Night of Kirk o' Field," on the other hand, I do not think any
apology is necessary for my reconstruction of the precise manner in
which Darnley met his death. The event has long been looked upon as one
of the mysteries of history--the mystery lying in the fact that whilst
the house at Kirk o' Field was destroyed by an explosion, Darnley's body
was found at some distance away, together with that of his page, bearing
every evidence of death by strangulation. The explanation I adopt seems
to me to owe little to speculation.

In the story of Antonio Perez--"The Night of Betrayal"--I have permitted
myself fewer liberties with actual facts than might appear. I have
closely followed his own "Relacion," which, whilst admittedly a piece
of special pleading, must remain the most authoritative document of the
events with which it deals. All that I have done has been to reverse
the values as Perez presents them, throwing the personal elements into
higher relief than the political ones, and laying particular stress upon
the matter of his relations with the Princess of Eboli. "The Night of
Betrayal" is presented in the form of a story within a story. Of the
containing story let me say that whilst to some extent it is fictitious,
it is by no means entirely so. There is enough to justify most of it in
the "Relaciori" itself.

The exceptions mentioned being made, I hope it may be found that I have
adhered rigorously to my purpose of owing nothing to invention in my
attempt to flesh and clothe these few bones of history.

I should add, perhaps, that where authorities differ as to motives,
where t